Metropolis

Metropolis.

In Pop Culture?

You know when you sit down in a Century owned movie theater? With your big crate of popcorn and junior mints and "small" soda the size of your entire torso? And their logo appears with that dramatic music? Well, that sounds like every movie theater logo, but Century's (I'm 99% sure this is Century Theaters I'm thinking of) starts with a bunch of vintage movie posters that layer on top of each other. One is of a blonde woman looking up, and another is of an Indiana Jones looking guy, but the one that gets the most screen-time, with the big once over of the entire poster, is Metropolis.

Sitting in that theater, I always wondered what that strange movie was that had that C-3PO looking robot on it. Metropolis? What is this mysterious movie?

I forget exactly when I put it together; that that strange movie poster from the theater logo was of the 1927 German silent film epic about a very grim future.

So, why is this movie important enough to be referenced almost every time I sit down to watch a movie in the theater (almost all the theaters in my hometown are Century, which is why I'm 99% sure this logo is Century's)? Scratch that, why is this movie important enough to get referenced in Star Wars?

Yes. After a little bit of research, it appears that it is no coincidence that the robot from Metropolis looks like C3PO (or rather, that C3PO looks like robot from Metropolis). Apparently, Mr. George Lucas (a USC alum, thank you very much) modeled his famed golden robot off of the famed golden robot in Metropolis.

So, is this movie really worth all this referencing? Is it really great enough to be a classic? Should I give a damn?

In Case You Haven't Seen Metropolis, Here's A Quick Summary:

The movie takes place in the future. Way in the future. Like, this was made in 1927 and we haven't even gotten to the future it depicts yet (we passed up the "future" of 1984 eons ago). It's a dystopian future (observation: I can not think of a single movie or book that depicts the future in a good light. How depressed are we?). In this dystopia, there are 10 hours on the clock and workers work 10 hour shifts. Their lives are controlled by Joh Frederson, the ruler of Metropolis, who keeps his innocent son completely in the dark about the goings on in the underbelly of the city that keep Metropolis running. Until one day...

The son spends a day in the life of a worker after stumbling upon a machinery accident when he was looking for his brothers. At the end of his stumbled upon day as a worker, he stumbles upon an underground meeting, lead by the preacher Maria, who tells the workers that there must be communication between the hand (the workers) and the brain (Joh Frederson) via the heart (cut to the son).

Then, this is where the robot comes in. A mad scientist dude shows Joh the meeting through a weirdo cave up above the whole scene. Joh tells the mad scientist dude to model his recently made robot after Maria, the preacher. Then, he tells the robot version to tell the workers to revolt.

Stop.

What? Maybe it's just me, but I got very confused with this aspect of the plot. Why does he want the workers to revolt and destroy the machines? I think it's said that he wants a reason to use violence against the workers, but really, this is an incredibly stupid plan on his part. There really isn't any man-power on his side. Everyone in his power are potentially revolting workers. There are only, like, two guys shown on his side vs. HUNDREDS!!!

The number of extras in this movie shocked and awed me. There are literally HUNDREDS of people in some scenes. I mean, I thought The General used a lot of people, but Metropolis wins in the "Awesome Masses" category.

So, because there were so many people used to make such an impact with what the film was saying (which was very communist, anti-industrial revolution, you know the drill), I think I can excuse the very awkward plot error. Maybe he was just delusional in his plan? We'll use that as his excuse.

And Maria was a woman.

Yes! Maria was a woman! I was very happy to watch a film where the key of the movie, the preacher, the robot was played by a woman! And not just any woman, but a brilliant actress who I thought was amazing in the role, Ms. Brigette Helm. Yes! She was awesome! And the role didn't have to be a woman. Sure, there was a slightly awkward love story between the son and Maria tossed in there, but the story could have been written with a man as the revolutionary, in my opinion (if you give a damn). But it was so much better as a woman! And I may have to look up and rent more Brigette Helm movies, where she hopefully plays a robot because her spinning and turning and movement was so robotic and crazy and awesome. I never for a second was confused if she was being the robot or if she was being Maria.

Now, I'm done with the feminist part of this post.

The Conclusion?

I liked Metropolis. Honestly, I did not expect to. First of all, I was very turned off by the idea of a 2 hour long silent movie. Second of all... I really don't know. I didn't really know much about it, so I don't know why I assumed I wouldn't like it.

But I did like it. I was fascinated the entire time and it didn't even feel like 2 hours and there was barely any need for dialogue. I mean, some silent movies there's a lot of talking, and you can see their mouths moving and they show the whole conversation, but they only give you one line of what they're saying on the card. This annoys me. I try to lip-read. I want to know what they're saying! But, even though there was a lot of speaking during the preaching bits, the rest really didn't need sound at all. It wasn't at all a silent movie wishing that it were born in the talkies. And although I was tempted to lip-read sometimes (which, I realized halfway through couldn't possibly work because they were speaking German, which I don't know), I really didn't feel like I was missing out on anything. The title cards were used exactly as needed; not too many, and not too few.

So I would have to agree, Metropolis is a deserving classic.

COMING SOON: Nosferatu and Dracula vs... Twilight? Ew...